Battlestations: Pacific At 7 O’Clock!

It’s battle of the new Battles today. Eidos have revealed details about the new Battlestations game, Battlestations: Pacific.


Details and screenshots below.

Last year’s Battlestations: Midway was met with a slightly muted reception. You could take control of planes, boats, submarines, etc, in a large-scale depiction of the battles between America and Japan. Think Carrier Command, where you could control the action at a strategic distance, or leap into the controls of any unit involved. Most reviews recognised the sheer volume of detail, but were disappointed by the lack of space and depth.

It seems that a lot of this is to be recognised in Pacific, not least by its doubling in size, with twice the number of available missions. The World War II strategic action will carry on from where it left off, and add in a new twist.


Eidos explains,

“As the Americans, the game picks up the story where Battlestations: Midway left off and allows players to fight their way from The Battle of Midway to Okinawa as they try to secure peace in the Pacific. As the Japanese however, players take control of the Imperial Japanese fleet and have the unique chance to fight at Pearl Harbor before attempting to change the course of history and take full control of the Pacific Ocean.”

We like changing the course of history at RPS, but we’re constantly in trouble with the Time Police. Sorry about saving the lives of Paul Daniels and Debbie Magee in 1987, by the way.


In a confusing declaration, the Eidos “Brand Manager” (what a strangely ugly job title), Trevor Burrows, proclaims,

“Battlestations: Pacific is even bigger, more authentic and innovative than ever before, taking the Battlestations franchise to the next level and allowing players to relive some of the most memorable battles in modern history, as well as gain an insight into what could have been, should Japan have gained the upper hand against the United States.”

How exactly is that “more authentic”? But I’m being picky.

It’s being developed for the PC and 360, with lots of attention being paid to online shennanigans, as you’d hope. There’s no release date yet, but you can bet your bum it’ll be late this year.

Screenshots? Why, over here.


  1. Meat Circus says:

    I’ve been bored of the Second World War since I was twelve. And I wasn’t even there.

    We need some new wars solely for the benefit of game settings.

  2. MrCrun says:

    Yeah, we should try Madagascar or Easter Island. Not that they’ve done anything wrong but I’m sure we could think of something. In the case of Easter Island maybe we should go to war with ALL the really small pacific island just to drag it out a bit. It’d be like Hostile Waters!

  3. Man Raised By Puffins says:

    I had fun times with the multiplayer demo of Midway on the 360, but never really contemplated buying it. The main draw for me was piloting the larger battleships, waiting for all the gun lights to light up and then letting loose with a full broadside. Quite possibly one of the most satisfying implementations of rumble ever.

  4. hungSolo says:

    Is this the descendant of the BattleStations I played a bajillion years ago on the Saturn? A quick google says that was published by EA. God, I was bad at that game.

  5. A Lego Enthusiast says:

    I thought BS:W was great fun :(

  6. Grant Gould says:

    We need some new wars solely for the benefit of game settings.

    Bring on the First World War shooters! You wait for days staring at mud, then jump up and start to run over more mud only to die instantly.

    Or the Spanish Civil War shooters! You sit in impassible mountains for days, firing at pointlessly long range at vaguely glimpsed enemy positions, missing ineffectively, for weeks on end. Then you run out of ammunition or are blown up by a bomber raid or are shot by your allies for ideological deviation.

  7. sh33333p says:

    WW2 Games = Epoch fail.

    [stolen from XKCD]

  8. ganz says:

    were getting pacific 2 months before the yanks, yeeeharrrrrr!